The RDF working group charter identifies eight possible deliverables, all of which of which may be on recommendation track. Dates are expressed in the form T+X, where T is 2011-02, the start of the group activities, and X the number of months.

The RDF working group charter identifies eight possible deliverables, all of which of which may be on recommendation track. Dates are expressed in the form T+X, where T is 2011-02, the start of the group activities, and X the number of months.

−

{|

+

{| border="1"

! Charter deliverable

! Charter deliverable

! Type

! Type

Line 400:

Line 400:

| TBD

| TBD

|-

|-

−

| rowspan="2"|D6

+

| rowspan="3"|D6

−

| rowspan="2"|Rec

+

| rowspan="3"|Rec

| FPWD

| FPWD

| TBD

| TBD

−

| rdf-json

+

| json-ld-syntax

| TBD

| TBD

|-

|-

−

| LC

+

| rowspan="2"|LC

+

| rowspan="2"|TBD

+

| json-ld-syntax

+

| TBD

+

|-

+

| json-ld-api

| TBD

| TBD

−

| rdf-json

| TBD

| TBD

|}

|}

Revision as of 16:23, 29 January 2013

Contents

RDF Working Group Charter Extension Request

The RDF working group, created in February 2011, has an initial lifetime of 24 months, with a charter ending on 31 January 2013. The group has just released 4 Last Call Working Drafts and requests an extension of eleven months to progress these specifications to Recommendation (until 31 December 2013). Note that the timetable is a bit stricter and aims at the Recommendations during summer 2013, but the extension leaves some room for possible shifts.

The abbreviations in the tables below stand for the following Working Group documents:

RDF Working Group Status

The group has a healthy membership and a set of core participants (about 20) actively contributing to and and reviewing specifications. The mailing list archive (over 6,700 messages) and the tracker (111 issues, 12 of which remain open) are good indicators of the activity of the working group. Oracle, IBM, Google and the Apache Software Foundation are active participants.

Many members have indicated their intention to implement the specifications, suggesting the need for this decadal update to RDF.

Since its launch, the group has released the following working drafts. Four Recommendation-track documents were published as Last Call Working Draft.

Deviation from Charter

The RDF working group charter identifies eight possible deliverables, all of which of which may be on recommendation track. Dates are expressed in the form T+X, where T is 2011-02, the start of the group activities, and X the number of months.

Charter deliverable

Type

Stage

Predicted date

Actual document

Actual date

D1

Rec

FPWD

TBD

rdf-cas

TBD

LC

TBD

rdf-cas

TBD

D2

Rec

FPWD

TBD

rdf-sem

TBD

LC

TBD

rdf-sem

TBD

D3

Rec

FPWD

TBD

rdf-xml

TBD

LC

TBD

rdf-xml

TBD

D4

Rec

FPWD

TBD

rdf-schema

TBD

LC

TBD

rdf-schema

TBD

D5

Rec

FPWD

TBD

rdf-turtle

TBD

LC

TBD

rdf-turtle

TBD

D6

Rec

FPWD

TBD

json-ld-syntax

TBD

LC

TBD

json-ld-syntax

TBD

json-ld-api

TBD

TBD

D1 (RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax) was delayed due to the group's discussions relating to treatment of RDF graphs, datasets and the relationships between them. However, the document has made steady progress and is nearly ready for Last Call status. The document is currently waiting on the first WD of RDF Semantics.

D2 (RDF 1.1 Semantics) was substantially delayed due to fundamental disagreements within the group. However, all 12 issues have been successfully resolved and the document is now being drafted.

D3 (RDF/XML Syntax Specification) was determined not to require major changes or updates. Minor errata will be repaired. This document was not completed earlier due to the necessity of gaining consensus on the concepts and semantics issues.

D4 (RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.1: RDF Schema) was determined not to require major changes or updates. Minor errata will be repaired. This document was not completed earlier due to the necessity of gaining consensus on the concepts and semantics issues.

D5 (RDF Turtle Syntax Specification) has proceeded in an orderly fashion. Discussions related to RDF graphs and datasets necessitated the splitting of this deliverable into two documents, Turtle and TriG, as allowed by our charter.

D6 (RDF JSON Syntax Specification) was returned to the JSON-LD Interest Group for further work for approximately one year until adequately mature. The specification was returned to the RDF WG in June 2012. Work has proceeded consistently since that time.

D7 (RDF Primer) was delayed due to the necessity of gaining consensus on the concepts and semantics issues.

D8 (RDF Test Cases) was delayed due to the necessity of gaining consensus on the concepts and semantics issues.

Proposed Timetable

The proposed revised timetable is as follows.

TODO: timetable

Participation

The following participants have indicated their interest in continued participation in the RDF Working Group, and work on implementation (where appropriate) is ongoing: